On Wednesday during the closing segment of a three-and-a-half hour keynote presentation at his company's developers conference, CEO Larry Page chided the media for its interpretation of his company's relationship with other technology firms. Making one of his first public appearances since missing company events with vocal cord ailments last year, Page made it clear that he was unhappy with the portrayal of Google as a divisive figure in Silicon Valley.

"Every story I read about Google is kind of 'us versus some other company' or some stupid thing, and I just don't find that very interesting," said Page. "We should be building things that don't exist."

Early critics of Google's new music service, however, would argue that the Mountain View, Calif.-based company is doing the exact opposite of what its cofounder wants. Announced at Google I/O shortly before Page's appearance on stage, "Google Play Music All Access" places the $303 billion (market capitalization) tech behemoth squarely in the path of companies like Spotify and Rdio in a crowded music streaming space that provides users no shortage of options.

While Google's music application had been a rumored announcement a day before the conference, most held their commentary on the search giant's new foray into audio streaming until after the service was unveiled at I/O. At the conference, it was initially met with applause from the Google-hospitable crowd--as were most products--but it didn't take long for skeptics to call out the company in light of Page's pronouncements.

"Google fans seem to eat this kumbaya stuff up, to really believe it," wrote John Gruber, a blogger who runs the -friendly site Daring Fireball. "But Google is the company that built Android after the iPhone, Google Plus after and now a subscription music service after Spotify."

Those skeptical of All Access point to its similarities with preceding competitors, of which there are plenty. With regards to the actual music, Google's service offers millions of songs across 22 genres from the major labels of Universal Music, Entertainment Group and Warner Music Group, though its catalogue on a macroscopic level seems undifferentiated from the likes of Rdio, for example. The use cases for All Access also offer little variance, with user-curated playlists drawing comparisons to features on Spotify. The "laid-back" radio-like streaming approach that was championed by Google Engineering Director Chris Yerga at I/O, can be likened to Pandora.

Priced at $9.99 a month--similar to Spotify but more expensive that Pandora at $3.99--All Access seems like a development created more out of necessity than out of innovation, says Forrester analyst and Forbes contributor James McQuivey.

"If Google failed to make a play for the music business, it would later regret it because its customers would remain forever tied to another digital service even if Google Android and Chrome devices continue their dominance," he said. "That explains why Google Play is adding All Access."

[newsincvid id="24824291"]

After coming up short with its attempts at an online audio library with Google Music in 2011, the Larry Page-led company does not want to fall behind again in the musical arms race. That realization comes at a time when Apple, Amazon and even Beats Electronics have been reported to be building out their own streaming capabilities, while Spotify, Pandora and Berlin-based SoundCloud continue to thrive in unique audio verticals. SoundCloud CEO Alexander Ljung, however, didn't seem worried by the entry of another big player.

"Google's All Access provides more choice to consumers, but the more players in the space that launch an all-you-can-eat subscription service the more obvious it becomes that SoundCloud is the only true differentiated platform... providing everyone the opportunity to discover new and original music and audio," he said.

For now, it remains to be seen if users of other audio platforms would be willing to make the switch to Google's service, which is currently only available in the U.S. There's not much more you can do to attract them "short of making the music free," said McQuivey, who believes the company missed a significant chance to expand.

"The real opportunity is for a blended media subscription experience, imagine a $24.99 a month for all-access music, free Netflix-like streaming, two current movie downloads and a lending library for paid games where you can "check out" one paid game at a time for free for one week," he said. "That would be a way to make Google Play media content do more than merely copy iTunes, Pandora and Spotify."